ADA. Service animals. Discrimination. Flying

[GriseldaLeela]

Washington state. Delta has made some policy banning “bull type dogs” including service animals. That means nothing, they call any dog with a big head a pitbull. I know this is against the ADA and I have flown with my service dog several times, on delta too. I know a lot of people abuse the system and have barking little dogs climbing on stuff and misbehaving, but well trained working dogs are being singled out by “breed”

Is it possible to start a class action against them for discrimination? Also I have a ton of skymiles I can’t use now and want compensation.

 

[justalayman]

There are requirements for a suit to be classified as a class action. Whether there are enough pit bull owners affected is a question that I can’t answer but i suspect not


Until you are denied, actually denied, you have no standing to sue yet yourself.

 

[ajkroy]

I also think there are terms that are used interchangeably, but really shouldn't be. Emotional support animals are not service animals. While I do not know all of the policies of every service animal trainer, I would be surprised if any pitbull or mastiff breed would be trained as such.

 

[quincy]

I also think there are terms that are used interchangeably, but really shouldn't be. Emotional support animals are not service animals. While I do not know all of the policies of every service animal trainer, I would be surprised if any pitbull or mastiff breed would be trained as such.

The ADA does not restrict breeds. Any breed of dog can be trained as a service dog.

FAQs: https://www.ada.gov/regs2010/service_animal_qa.html

And any animal can be an emotional support animal.

Here is a link to the Air Carrier Access Act: https://www.transportation.gov/individuals/aviation-consumer-protection/service-animals-including-emotional-support-animals

 

[Taxing Matters]

I don't know what Delta was thinking in adopting that policy. Its lawyers had to have told the company that it would lose on that when challenged in court. And the PR department of the airline should have known that the negative fallout from disabled passengers would outweigh any perceived benefit in banning these breeds. The smart thing to do is to ban specific dogs that are misbehaving or have had a history on past flights of misbehaving.

I also think that disabled advocacy groups, businesses, and Congress need to get together to find a solution to the problem of pet owners abusing the ADA to get their pets into business establishments. That abuse gives service animals a bad name and makes things harder for the truly disabled.

 

[ajkroy]

The ADA does not restrict breeds. Any breed of dog can be trained as a service dog.

FAQs: https://www.ada.gov/regs2010/service_animal_qa.html

And any animal can be an emotional support animal.

Here is a link to the Air Carrier Access Act: https://www.transportation.gov/individuals/aviation-consumer-protection/service-animals-including-emotional-support-animals

I agree that the ADA doesn't restrict. But those who do the training might. There is a reason why most service animals are Labs, Goldens, and Shepherds. There is also a reason why many insurance companies ban certain pit/mastiff breeds from coverage in policies.

 

[not2cleverRed]

I agree that the ADA doesn't restrict. But those who do the training might. There is a reason why most service animals are Labs, Goldens, and Shepherds. There is also a reason why many insurance companies ban certain pit/mastiff breeds from coverage in policies.

Don't forget standard poodles! (Totally different from miniatures.)

 

[commentator]

As a person who spent a lot of time in my life owning, breeding and training animals, I honestly believe there must be coming up some not less but more reality checks done on the whole "service animal" thing in our society. I have owned pit bulls/mastiff type breeds, and they're pound for pound exceptionally strong animals, just harder to control simply because they're very strong and rather dominant. In general some breeds are not quite so eager to please humans as some other groups.

I do not think there is any reasonable argument that "they've got the same rights and are just as good...." as if it were racial prejudice against humans they were fighting. I've seen little old frail looking folks walking pit bulls through public places, assuring everyone "He's a sweetheart! He just loves people! He doesn't bite!" knowing full well that if that dog decided to go somewhere, there would not be a chance in the world that the owner could do something about it. It's like they were walking around with a loaded gun. On a plane, or in a crowded airport, it's a potential nightmare.

I'll probably be assailed for this position, but hey, reality bites!

 

[quincy]

I agree that the ADA doesn't restrict. But those who do the training might. There is a reason why most service animals are Labs, Goldens, and Shepherds. There is also a reason why many insurance companies ban certain pit/mastiff breeds from coverage in policies.

Delta's current policy bars travel with "bull dog type" service dogs (and hedgehogs and goats). The ban comes after Delta has reported crew members being bitten by bull dog type service dogs.

The ACAA allows for airlines to refuse travel to service animals that pose "a direct threat to the health or safety of others." The problem with Delta's ban comes with its general bar on a type of dog, especially since "bull dog type" encompasses a wide range of dogs.

The ban will be challenged and, if previous court challenges against pit bull service dog bans are any indication, Delta will lose.

 

[xylene]

I love Delta. They are a good airline.

I'm sure Delta is courting a case, now we can clear up that a fighting dog doesn't belong on a plane. The public is less sympathetic than it seems to pet enthusiasts and with the news cycle it will be forgotten in a day.

Boycott this of that airline. Right. There wasn't a big boycott over some guy getting his face punched in for no partuicular reason (and I didn't mind that either, he was in the wrong) there wont be over a common sense clamp down on inherently dangerous dogs.

 

[quincy]

What is unusual about the pit bull dog is that neither PETA nor the ASPCA object to a breed-wide sterilization of these dogs. Pit bull type dogs reportedly account for the majority of dog attack injuries and deaths.

However, bans on dog breeds do not stand up well in court when a banned breed is a service animal. Following is a link to one court decision (there have been a few) that favored a pit bull service animal owner over a city whose city ordinance banned pit bulls.

Sak v. City of Aurelia, Iowa:
http://www.iand.uscourts.gov/e-web/decisions.nsf/0/0BE05423C4AE1D7E862579750060D93C/$File/MWB-11-CV-4111,+Sak+v.+City+of+Aurelia,+Injunction-Title+II+of+ADA+Claim+re+ordinance+barring+pit+bull+dogs,+12282011.pdf

 

[FlyingRon]

PETA isn't hardly indicative of anything. They would rather kill all pets rather than subject them to the "oppression" of their human masters.

 

[quincy]

PETA isn't hardly indicative of anything. They would rather kill all pets rather than subject them to the "oppression" of their human masters.

For PETA to support sterilization as reasonable and humane indicates that bull dogs are widely recognized by even animal rights organizations as a problematic breed that needs breed control.

 

[FlyingRon]

For PETA to support sterilization as reasonable and humane indicates that bull dogs are widely recognized by even animal rights organizations as a problematic breed that needs breed control.

No, that's not the case. PETA doesn't give a hoot about breeds. They are against all pet ownership.
Read their own diatribe on the issue:

https://www.peta.org/blog/peta-position-pit-bulls/

 

[quincy]

PETA definitely has an agenda. That does not discount the fact that their stance on the sterilization of bull dog breeds is in alignment with other animal rights organizations.